I will not attempt a Blog here in the full sense of that concept, but rather a personal journal where I will record some of the stories that thought turns to in those rare moments of clarity when I am not interfering with it.

About Me

Smith was raised in South Central Los Angeles in the 1930s and 40s. Smith is a combat veteran (Korea, 7th Cavalry, where he was twice wounded), has been a deputy sheriff (Los Angeles County), a bull fighter (Mexico), a merchant seaman, and was in Saigon during the Tet offensive of 1968 as a freelance writer. He has been described by the Los Angeles Times as an "anarchist libertarian," and by the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith as one of the most dangerous "extremists" in America. He has been married to a Mexican woman for 30 years, there are two children, and now two grandchildren.
Smith argues that the German WMD (gas-chamber) question should be examined in the routine manner that all other historical questions are examined. He argues that the Holocaust is not a "Jewish" story, but a story of Jews and Germans together--forever. Those who want to challenge the concept of the "unique monstrosity" of the Germans should be free to do so. He believes it is morally wrong, and a betrayal of the Western ideal of intellectual freedom, to imprison writers and publishers who question publicly what privately they have come to doubt.

Thursday, December 15, 2005

REVISIONISM: A CRIME OF THE MIND

Stephen Smith of the Holocaust Memorial Day Trust writes that Holocaust “denial” (that is, free inquiry, skepticism, historical investigation, public debate, intellectual freedom) is a “crime of the mind.” Who benefits? Among others, The Holocaust Memorial Day Trust. I suppose the Trust has access to a good amount of money. Follow the money. It is a crime of the mind to do anything that will undermine the influence of those who are getting the money. This is why some revisionists play with the word “holocau$t.”

David Golding of the Israeli Embassy in Dublin wants an apology because Keating’s article questions “our God and our religion.” It is very much like a “crime of the mind” to question what has been written about Golding’s God and his religion. Those who forward the concept of “crimes of the mind” to restrict public discourse are themselves the primary beneficiaries of such charges, and of the “crimes” themselves, which are in turn forwarded as fundraisers to forward the need for laws against crimes of the mind.

Justin Keating on IsraelThe Dubliner, November 2005

I have reached the conclusion that the Zionists have absolutely no right in what they call Israel, that they have built their state not beside but on top of the Palestinian people, and that there can be no peace as long as contemporary Israel retains its present form. I hasten to make clear that none of this gives me any pleasure, but in the great scheme of things my personal wishes do not weigh heavily in the scale pans of history. I wish I did not think what I do, I hope I am wrong. My conclusions are based on the answers to five questions.

In London, Stephen Smith, chairman of the Holocaust Memorial Day Trust, said: “Holocaust denial is a crime of the mind. It is designed to insult the dead, humiliate the survivors and to make us disbelieve the scarcely believable.”

Spokesman David Golding of the Israeli Embassy in Dublin requested an apology from the Dubliner, “I found [the article] offensive and hurtful … it questions our God and our religion. I am very angry and disappointed that an eminent Irish historian could produce such revisionist rubbish.”

You could argue that this refers to producer-gas vans, not to homicidal gas vans.

But Mr. Meyer in his extremely flawed article about Auschwitz death toll supplied the following information:

"A gas van is said to have been used for smaller groups, namely in a sandpit by a special commando Ruryck (version of 1946: Ryryck), using a Saur lorry which had been in service in Russia, with the registration number Pol 71-462, 4m long, 2,5m wide, chauffeur: Oberwachtmeister Arndt. Friedman based his account on the report of a resistance group in Auschwitz which on 21.9.1943 sent the information to Cracow that "a gas van of the make Saur was stationed with an engine plough, in order to carry out executions with engine fumes on order of the police summary court martial"."

In your opinion, what is the probability of one completely innocent "producer-gas van" from USSR, among the (alleged) thousands of them, first belonging to a unit one of whose main aims was mass murder, then turning up in Poland, only to be described in a resistance message as a homicidal gas van?

Let's see if you have an honest answer without the usual dismissal of the documents in question as fakes. :-)

PS: Perhaps I should also mention that one of PS-501 documents, the letter of July 13, 1942, mentions "S-Wagen Pol 71463"...

I don't do gas vans, or gas chambers, or anything else that needs an engineer, chemist, or other professional to sort out the wheat from the chaff. Never have. I suggest you go to Fritz Berg's page at www.nazigassings.com and write him directly.

You probably are aware of the Web sites for the Institute for Historical Review and Germar Rudolf's VHO. They all have materials on this matter.

Are you by any chance the Romanov who I occasionally see bendng his elbow at The Old World in Huntington Beach?

No, it must be another Romanov. I did have exchanges with Mr. Berg, which did not leave me with the impresson of him being very reasonable. I did present the first document to him, which he interpreted exactly as being a producer-gas van at the time, if I remember correctly. I will present him with the new information, but, of course, I expect only the usual handwaving dismissal of "communist forgeries", things of that sort.